public inbox for git@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Justin Tobler <jltobler@gmail.com>
To: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Cc: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>,
	"René Scharfe" <l.s.r@web.de>,
	git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] odb: drop gaps in object info flag values
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2026 14:32:33 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aYpBH2eSjArsM_To@denethor> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aXhbXQo6taM33m-1@pks.im>

On 26/01/27 07:29AM, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> Unfortunately, the other callsite wouldn't see a warning because we pass
> an integer constant, and the compiler doesn't complain about that at
> all. It also falls apart once you start to OR multiple flags together.

I guess we could have enum values to each of the combinations that get
used together, but that problably isn't a great idea if we use many
different combinations and may not be good in the long term.

> It would be great if there was a way to tell the compiler that a given
> flags field expects only enum values so that it could always warn about
> misuse. But I'm not aware of any way to do this.

I agree with the sentiment. Passing a combination of enum values as
unsigned flags is a bit fragile and in some ways feels like it defeats
the point of using enums to begin with. Also when using a function that
accepts flags, it is not always immediately obvious which set of flags
are expected.

> We could of course start to take a more heavy-handed approach and always
> accept an options struct instead. E.g.
> 
>     struct odb_read_object_info_options {
>             unsigned lookup_replace : 1,
>                      quick : 1,
>                      skip_fetch_object : 1,
>                      for_prefetch : 1,
>                      die_if_corrupt : 1;
>     };
> 
> That would give us full type safety, and it would be impossible to
> misuse without getting a compiler warning. Furthermore, with designated
> initializers it wouldn't be _that_ awful to use:
> 
> 	if (!odb_read_object_extended(ctx->repo->objects, &list->oid[i],
> 				      (struct odb_read_object_info_options) {
> 		.skip_fetch_object = 1,
> 	}) < 0) {
> 		die("...");
> 	}
> 
> But I wouldn't exactly call it ergonomic, either.

This would certainly be the most safe option, but I also agree that it
not particually ergonomic. I'm not sure it's worth going this far as
long as it's documented/easy-to-find the corresponding set of flags.

> So I'm not sure whether this partial protection would be worth it, but
> if you think it is I'm happy to reroll.

I think this version of series is good and doesn't need a reroll.

Thanks,
-Justin

  reply	other threads:[~2026-02-09 20:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-01-26 12:17 [PATCH 0/3] Small fixups for `OBJECT_INFO` flags Patrick Steinhardt
2026-01-26 12:17 ` [PATCH 1/3] builtin/backfill: fix flags passed to `odb_has_object()` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-01-26 20:17   ` Derrick Stolee
2026-01-26 21:07     ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-09 19:57   ` Justin Tobler
2026-02-10  9:24   ` Karthik Nayak
2026-02-10  9:32     ` Karthik Nayak
2026-01-26 12:17 ` [PATCH 2/3] builtin/fsck: " Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-09 20:04   ` Justin Tobler
2026-01-26 12:17 ` [PATCH 3/3] odb: drop gaps in object info flag values Patrick Steinhardt
2026-01-26 16:58   ` Junio C Hamano
2026-01-26 18:02     ` René Scharfe
2026-01-26 18:13       ` Junio C Hamano
2026-01-27  6:29         ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-09 20:32           ` Justin Tobler [this message]
2026-02-09 20:18   ` Justin Tobler
2026-01-26 16:28 ` [PATCH 0/3] Small fixups for `OBJECT_INFO` flags Junio C Hamano
2026-02-12  6:59 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] " Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-12  6:59   ` [PATCH v2 1/5] builtin/backfill: fix flags passed to `odb_has_object()` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-12  6:59   ` [PATCH v2 2/5] builtin/fsck: " Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-12  6:59   ` [PATCH v2 3/5] odb: drop gaps in object info flag values Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-12  6:59   ` [PATCH v2 4/5] odb: convert object info flags into an enum Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-12  6:59   ` [PATCH v2 5/5] odb: convert `odb_has_object()` " Patrick Steinhardt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=aYpBH2eSjArsM_To@denethor \
    --to=jltobler@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=l.s.r@web.de \
    --cc=ps@pks.im \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox